Assessment of psychopathology across and within cultures: issues and findings

Research based information on the impact of culture on psychopathology is reviewed, with particular reference to depression, somatization, schizophrenia, anxiety, and dissociation. A number of worldwide constants in the incidence and mode of expression of psychological disorders are identified, especially in relation to schizophrenia and depression. The scope of variation of psychopathological manifestations across cultures is impressive. Two tasks for future investigations involve the determination of the generic relationship between psychological disturbance and culture and the specification of links between cultural characteristics and psychopathology. To this end, hypotheses are advanced pertaining to the cultural dimensions investigated by Hofstede and their possible reflection in psychiatric symptomatology. It is concluded that the interrelationship of culture and psychopathology should be studied in context and that observer, institution, and community variables should be investigated together with the person's experience of distress and disability.

The definition and classification of Koro

Attempts at defining and classifying Koro have been undertaken by various researchers over at least the last fifty years without any consensus emerging to date. The occurrence of Koro, not only in different parts of the world but also in association with varied morbidities, has of late diluted its primary identity as a culture-bound syndrome. Further, the DSM-IIIR and ICD-10 provisions to include culture-bound syndromes like Koro are open to various diagnostic options. Consideration was given to have it included in DSM-IV. One of the fundamental problems inherent in such attempts is the semantic confusion Koro generates in its basic phenomenological analysis. The present paper deals with some of these issues based on historical analysis of world Koro literature, and with comments on the future research agendum.